Feature: Conclusion to Literature

References

1. AhrensRüdiger, and VolkmannLaurenz. Why Literature Matters: Theories and Functions of Literature, Universitätsverlag Winter 1996.
   [Google Scholar]
2. AlterRobert.. The Pleasures of Reading in an Ideological Age, Norton 1996.
   [Google Scholar]
3. AmmonsElizabeth.. Brave New Words: How Literature Will Save the Planet, U of Iowa P 2010.
   [Google Scholar]
4. AndersonLarry.. “Using Reader-Response Theory in the Introductory Literature Classroom.” College Literature, vol.18, no.2, June 1991, pp. 141–45.
   [Google Scholar]
5. AndrianovaAnastassiya.. “Accounting for Achilles: Teaching Literature to Non-Majors.” Syllabus, vol.2, no.1 2013, pp. 1–10. .
   [Google Scholar]
6. “Bachelor’s Degrees in the Humanities.” Humanities Indicators, American Academy of Arts and Sciences Mar. 2016, www.humanitiesindicators.org/content/indicatordoc.aspx?i=34.
   [Google Scholar]
7. BaeckerDiann L.. “Uncovering the Rhetoric of the Syllabus: The Case of the Missing I.” College Teaching, vol.46, no.2, Spring 1998, pp. 58–62.
   [Google Scholar]
8. BarnetSylvan, et al. editors. An Introduction to Literature: Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. 16th ed, Longman 2011.
   [Google Scholar]
9. BérubéMichael.. “The Humanities, Declining? Not According to the Numbers.” The Chronicle of Higher Education, 1July 2013, www.chronicle.com/article/The-Humanities-Declining-Not/140093/.
   [Google Scholar]
10. BrooksThomas.. “The Historical Necessity for—and Difficulties with—New Historical Analysis in Introductory Literature Courses.” College English, vol.49, no.5, Sept. 1987, pp. 509–22.
    [Google Scholar]
11. BrunsCristina Vischer.. Why Literature? The Value of Literary Reading and What It Means for Teaching, Continuum 2011.
    [Google Scholar]
12. CahalanJames M., and DowningDavid B. editors. Practicing Theory in Introductory College Literature Courses, National Council of Teachers of English 1991.
    [Google Scholar]
13. CarinoPeter.. “Alternatives to the Critical Paper: Teaching against the Text in the Introductory Literature Class.” Journal of Teaching Writing, vol.12, no.2 1994, pp. 247–62.
    [Google Scholar]
14. ChaceWilliam M.. “The Decline of the English Department.” The American Scholar, 1Sept. 2009, theamericanscholar.org/the-decline-of-the-english-department/.
    [Google Scholar]
15. ChickeringHowell D.. “Creative Reading: A First-Semester First-Year Course.” Pedagogy, vol.4, no.2, Spring 2004, pp. 263–88.
    [Google Scholar]
16. ClydesdaleTim.. The Purposeful Graduate: Why Colleges Must Talk to Students about Vocation, U of Chicago P 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
17. CollarMary L.. “‘Glossolalia’: Genre, History, and What We Call Introduction to Literature.” Journal of General Education, vol.34, no.1, Spring 1982, pp. 44–59.
    [Google Scholar]
18. EaganKevin, et al.The American Freshman: National Norms Fall 2016, Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA 2017.
    [Google Scholar]
19. EdmundsonMark.. Why Read?, Bloomsbury 2004.
    [Google Scholar]
20. FayMarion.. “Music in the Classroom: An Alternative Approach to Teaching Literature.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, vol.28, no.4, May 2001, pp. 372–78.
    [Google Scholar]
21. FelskiRita.. Uses of Literature, Blackwell 2008.
    [Google Scholar]
22. FinkSusan B.. “The Many Purposes of Course Syllabi: Which Are Essential and Useful?” Syllabus, vol.1, no.1 2012, pp. 1–12.
    [Google Scholar]
23. GillespieTim.. “Why Literature Matters.” English Journal, vol.83, no.8, Dec. 1994, pp. 16–21.
    [Google Scholar]
24. GraffGerald.. Professing Literature: An Institutional History 20th anniversary ed. U of Chicago P 2007.
    [Google Scholar]
25. GregoryMarshall.. “Do We Teach Disciplines or Do We Teach Students? What Difference Does It Make?”. Profession 2008, pp. 117–29.
    [Google Scholar]
26. GriffinTom.. The Boys Next Door, Dramatists Play Service 1988.
    [Google Scholar]
27. GrobmanLaurie.. “Researching the Conflicts: Undergraduate Research and the Introductory Literature Curriculum.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, vol.37, no.4, May 2010, pp. 372–83.
    [Google Scholar]
28. GwynnR. S. editor. Literature: A Pocket Anthology. 6th ed., Pearson 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
29. HannafordRichard.. “The Question of Relevance—Again?” Journal of English Teaching Techniques, vol.8, no.2 1975, pp. 18–23.
    [Google Scholar]
30. HassRobert.. Time and Materials: Poems, 1997–2005, Ecco 2007.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Horace.. “Ars Poetica” Translated by SmartC. and BlakeneyE. H.. Classic Writings on Poetry edited by HarmonWilliam. Columbia UP pp. 64–74.
    [Google Scholar]
32. HuemerWolfgang.. “Why Read Literature? The Cognitive Function of Form.” A Sense of the World: Essays on Fiction, Narrative and Knowledge edited by GibsonJohn, HuemerWolfgang, and PocciLuca. Routledge 2007, pp. 233–45.
    [Google Scholar]
33. It Takes More than a Major: Employer Priorities for College Learning and Student Success, Hart Research Associates April10 2013.
    [Google Scholar]
34. IzzoDavid Garrett.. “Teaching Introduction to American Literature: Holistic Literature of the Heart and Mind with The Great Gatsby as the Example.” Teaching American Literature: A Journal of Theory and Practice, vol.5, no.1, Fall 2011, pp. 12–24.
    [Google Scholar]
35. JolliffWilliam.. “Text as Topos: Using the Toulmin Model of Argumentation in Introduction to Literature.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, vol.25, no.2, May 1998, pp. 151–58.
    [Google Scholar]
36. JonesEd.. “The Rules of the Game in an Introductory Literature Class.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, vol.35, no.3, Mar. 2008, pp. 282–91.
    [Google Scholar]
37. KauJoseph.. “The Corporate Approach to Introductory Literature Courses.” College English, vol.38, no.1, Sept. 1976, pp. 50–61.
    [Google Scholar]
38. KennedyX. J., and GioiaDana editors. Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, Drama, and Writing. 13th ed., Pearson 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
39. KennedyX. J., et al. editors. Literature for Life, Pearson 2013.
    [Google Scholar]
40. KolbGwin J.. “Ends and Means: The Literature Course in the Junior College.” Illinois English Bulletin, vol.52, no.1, Oct. 1964, pp. 1–10.
    [Google Scholar]
41. LlosaMario Vargas.. “Why Literature? The Premature Obituary of the Book.” New Republic, 14May 2001, newrepublic.com/article/78238/mario-vargasllosa-literature/.
    [Google Scholar]
42. ManarinKaren, et al.Critical Reading in Higher Education: Academic Goals and Social Engagement, Indiana UP 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
43. MaysKelly J. editor. The Norton Introduction to Literature. 12th ed., Norton 2016.
    [Google Scholar]
44. McNabbCameron Hunt.. “Teaching to the Choir.” A Lifetime’s Training: Thoughts on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17May 2016, josheyler.word-press.com/2016/05/17/guest-post-teaching-to-the-choir-by-cameron-hunt-mcnabb/.
    [Google Scholar]
45. MelzerDan.. Assignments Across the Curriculum: A National Study of College Writing, Utah State UP 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
46. MorganDan.. “Connecting Literature to Students’ Lives.” College English, vol.55, no.5, Sept. 1993, pp. 491–503.
    [Google Scholar]
47. “Most Frequently Taken College Courses.” Humanities Indicators, American Academy of Arts and Sciences Mar. 2016, www.humanitiesindicators.org/content/indicatordoc.aspx?i=39.
    [Google Scholar]
48. MulveyJames.. “A Father/Child Unit for the Introductory Literature Class.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, vol.36, no.4, May 2009, pp. 392–96.
    [Google Scholar]
49. MurphyBrian Michael.. “Why Teach Literature Now?” Kenyon Review, 2Dec. 2013, www.kenyonreview.org/2013/12/teach-literature-now/.
    [Google Scholar]
50. NyeNaomi Shihab.. “The Traveling Onion.” Tender Spot: Selected Poems, Bloodaxe 2008.
    [Google Scholar]
51. OliverMary.. Thirst, Beacon 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
52. ParkesJay, and HarrisMary B.. “The Purposes of a Syllabus.” College Teaching, vol.50, no.2, Spring 2002, pp. 55–61.
    [Google Scholar]
53. PerloffMarjorie.. “In Defense of Poetry: Put the Literature Back into Literary Studies.” Boston Review, 1Dec. 1999, www.bostonreview.net/books-ideas/marjorie-perloff-defense-poetry.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Reading at Risk: A Survey of Literary Reading in America National Endowment for the Arts 2004, www.arts.gov/sites/default/files/ReadingAtRisk.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Reading on the Rise: A New Chapter in American Literacy National Endowment for the Arts 2009, www.arts.gov/sites/default/files/ReadingonRise.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
56. RemlerNancy Lawson.. “Using The Giving Tree to Teach Literary Criticism.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, vol.28, no.1, Sept. 2000, pp. 60–64.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Report to the Teagle Foundation on the Undergraduate Major in Language and Literature Modern Language Association 2009, apps.mla.org/pdf/2008_mla_whitepaper.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
58. The Role of Higher Education in Career Development: Employer Perceptions. The Chronicle of Higher Education, Dec. 2012.
    [Google Scholar]
59. SargentM. Elizabeth.. “Mapping the Required Introductory Literature Course for Nonmajors or Not-Yet Majors.” ADE Bulletin, vol.116 Spring 1997, pp. 8–18.
    [Google Scholar]
60. SchilbJohn, and CliffordJohn editors. Making Literature Matter: An Anthology for Readers and Writers. 6th ed., Bedford/St. Martin’s 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
61. ScholesRobert.. The Crafty Reader, Yale UP 2001.
    [Google Scholar]
62. ScottPauline.. “Owning the Journey: Using Collaborative Revisions of Little Red Riding Hood in Teaching Introduction to Literature at a Historically Black University.” CEA Forum, vol.41, no.1, Winter/Spring 2012, pp.94–108.
    [Google Scholar]
63. ShowalterElaine.. Teaching Literature, Blackwell 2003.
    [Google Scholar]
64. SidorkinAlexander M.. “Syllabus, the Genre.” Syllabus, vol.1, no.1 2012, pp. 1–4.
    [Google Scholar]
65. SlegalLee.. “Should Literature Be Useful?” The New Yorker, 6Nov. 2013, www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/should-literature-be-useful/.
    [Google Scholar]
66. SteinbergGillian.. “Literature and Influence: A New Model for Introductory Literature Courses.” Pedagogy, vol.13, no.3, Fall 2013, pp. 469–86.
    [Google Scholar]
67. To Read or Not to Read: A Question of National Significance National Endowment for the Arts 2007, www.arts.gov/sites/default/files/ToRead.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
68. TuckerLois P.. “Liberating Students through Reader-Response Pedagogy in the Introductory Literature Course.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, vol.28, no.2, Dec. 2000, pp. 199–206.
    [Google Scholar]
69. WebbAllen.. Literature and Lives: A Response-Based, Cultural Studies Approach to Teaching English, National Council of Teachers of English 2001.
    [Google Scholar]
70. WilkinsonMary A.. “Introductory Literature: Survey of Freshman Attitudes.” College English, vol.43, no.5, Sept. 1981, pp. 516–22.
    [Google Scholar]